9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant is having receipt for the activity namely display or exhibition nor the appellant have provided such service of display or exhibition under the facts and circumstances. The appellant is not liable to Service Tax under the classification Advertising Agency and/or providing a taxable service as an Advertising Agency in relation to advertisement in any manner. The decision in the case of Ajanta Fabrication Vs. CCE [2006 (10) TMI 1 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] where it was held that the appellant is not equipped for functioning as an advertising agency and thus, the services rendered by the appellant did not part take of or include the services in the nature of designing, conceptualizing, visualizing, normally rendered by the Advertising Agen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterial as per design given to it by their client, on the chosen materials such as cloth, PVC sheet, etc. It is also true that in contrast to advertising professionals who visualize or conceptualize how the given material (text or pictures or designs) should be presented the assessees is concerned with only re-producing the material taking into consideration the given guidelines in terms of size of lettering, placement of letters or pictures etc. Moreover, no evidence is produced from the Department's investigation to confirm the assessee is carrying out the activity of designing, visualizing or conceptualizing the material, which appears on the awnings/sign boards/hoardings. In absence of corroborative evidence, it is further observed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the appellant on the case of Tecumseh Products India Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. reported at 2004(167) E.L.T. 498 (SC), which deals with a bona fide dispute in regard to the question whether an activity involved any manufacturing activity or not, which is clearly not applicable in the present case. The Ld. Commissioner have held the extended period to be invocable and accordingly confirmed the duty with interest and penalty. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in Appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the parties. 4. In the course of hearing, the Ld. counsel for the appellant took us through the sample purchase orders and invoices placed at pages 193 to 202 of the paper book, wherein it is evident that neither any purchase order have been issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta Fabrication Vs. CCE reported in 2006(4) STR 605 (Tri-Delhi), wherein under similar activity of making of hoardings, sign boards signage, design of signage and their colour schemes etc. provided by the purchaser. This Tribunal held that the appellant is not equipped for functioning as an advertising agency and thus, the services rendered by the appellant did not part take of or include the services in the nature of designing, conceptualizing, visualizing, normally rendered by the Advertising Agency. The extended definition, cannot bring an entirely alien and unconnected services or a manufacturing activity within scheme of levy of service. And accordingly held that Ajanta Fabrication was not covered within the ambit of Service Tax under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
